The Fundamentalist Christian’s Victim Mentality on Science & Faith.

Many Christians argue that science has an anti-faith agenda. This is not an uncommon line of thought for many Christians as it goes beyond solely science and into history too. However, a great number of evangelicals view science as a problem because it clashes with their interpretations of scripture. In other words, because what scientists discover doesn’t agree with a biblical interpretation it means that they are out to corrupt and destroy the Christian faith. For example, fundamentalist Young Earth Creationism website Answers in Genesis describes how their scientific beliefs (the universe being a few thousand years old, dinosaurs coexisting with man etc.) is “suppressed” and “discriminated” against in the realms of scientific circles (1).

However, science is indifferent and doesn’t care much for religious faith (or any faith such as atheism). Scientists, more often than not, do their science to solve problems, get paid, and advance humankind’s knowledge. For instance, most ocean geologists drilling for diamonds are too busy trying to predict the exact location of their next rich sub-seafloor environment to lose sleep over the fact that their calculations don’t line up with somebody’s interpretation of Genesis.

There is an irony in this though. Consider that the Apostle Paul once wrote that “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).

Basically Paul claims that one’s investigation into the natural world will lead her to its creator. In other words, as many have argued, Christians aren’t to fear scientific investigation for such investigation only enhances one’s knowledge of the Christian God. However, when scientific research advances the reaction from many Christians is to downplay it or denounce it as atheistic, naturalistic rhetoric. Christianity is then rendered a weak, timid faith position that routinely flees into the shadows when scientists make new solid discoveries. Further, the Christian (such as those at AiG) will then claim discrimination because no-one (no credible scientists or academic journals) cares to take them seriously. One could point out that this is analogous to Jesus mythicism (those who promulgate the belief that Jesus never existed as a historical figure). One routinely sees mythicist proponents crying discrimination because nearly no credible historian considers their arguments. This is simply the case because no professionals in any fields take Jesus mythicists and Young Earth anti-evolutionist Christians seriously. To most they come over as a waste of time, and for professionals that means a waste of money too. Historians and scientists are too busy making a living to care about a fundamentalist fringe (of fringe) proponents.

Science does not have an anti-Christian agenda. In fact, many persuasively argue that science opens up gaps for God rather than shuts him out. And just because scientific discovery does not align with a Christian’s biblical interpretation it doesn’t make science anti-Christianity. It simply makes science anti the fundamentalist’s interpretation.

I’m interested to know–why accept what Paul says in Romans 1 here, but then deny what he says in Romans 15:3-4? “For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.”

You can’t be instructed by error–and I highly doubt Paul thought that error was written in the Scriptures for our instruction. I don’t ask this to divert the topic–I really am curious about the criteria you use to trust Paul in some places but then to say he was off in others.

James Bishop

James is from South Africa. He is a graduate in Creative Brand Communication and Marketing (CBC) & Theology (majoring in psychology). James obtained his BTh with cum laude, and is currently pursuing his postgraduate in Religious Studies.